Loop AI Labs, Inc. v. Gatti et al

Filing 989

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu denying without prejudice 519 Discovery Letter Brief; 584 Discovery Letter Brief; 607 Discovery Letter Brief; 679 Discovery Letter Brief; 691 Discovery Letter Brief; 715 Discovery Letter Brief; 769 Discovery Letter Brief. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/2/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

LOOP AI LABS INC,
Plaintiff,

8

ANNA GATTI, et al.,
Defendants.

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

ORDER ON OUTSTANDING
DISCOVERY MOTIONS

v.

9
10

Case No. 15-cv-00798-HSG (DMR)

Re: Dkt. Nos. 519, 584, 607, 679, 691, 715,
769

12

The following discovery motions are currently pending before the undersigned:

13

Docket No. 519, Defendant Almawave USA, Inc.’s (“Almawave”) discovery letter brief

14

regarding discovery from third parties Fabio Ficano and Elettranova, Inc.;
Docket No. 584, Defendant Almawave’s discovery letter brief regarding Plaintiff Loop AI

15
16
17
18
19

Labs, Inc.’s alleged lack of compliance with court orders regarding its document production;
Docket No. 607, Defendant IQSystem, Inc.’s motion for leave to file a discovery letter
brief to compel the continued deposition of Plaintiff’s witness Gianmauro Calafiore;
Docket No. 679, Defendant Almawave’s administrative motion for leave to file a discovery
letter brief to compel service of Plaintiff’s supplemental discovery responses;

20

Docket No. 691, Defendant Almawave’s administrative motion for leave to file a discovery

21

letter brief for sanctions for Plaintiff’s alleged refusal to comply with the court’s May 3, 2016

22

order;

23

Docket No. 715, Defendant Almawave’s administrative motion for leave to file a discovery

24

letter brief for sanctions for Plaintiff’s alleged failure to comply with court orders to produce

25

documents withheld on privilege grounds; and

26
27
28

Docket No. 769, Defendant Almawave’s discovery letter brief regarding the depositions of
Plaintiff’s expert witnesses.
All of the disputes addressed in these seven motions either overlap with the conduct at

1

issue in the Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam’s pending Order to Show Cause, (see Docket No.

2

894), or may be rendered moot by Judge Gilliam’s rulings on the outstanding motions for

3

summary judgment and for sanctions. Accordingly, the motions listed above are denied without

undersigned requesting reinstatement.

Dated: March 2, 2017
9

FO

ER

H

United States District Court
Northern District of California

RT

11

______________________________________
Donna M. Ryu . Ryu
nna M
United udge Do
J States Magistrate Judge

NO

10

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

R NIA

UNIT
ED

IT IS SO ORDERED.
8

RT
U
O

7

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

LI

6

after further rulings by Judge Gilliam, it may seek leave to do so by filing a letter to the

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

A

5

prejudice pending the outcome of those proceedings. If a moving party seeks to reinstate a motion

S

4

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C